As the French invade Mali under the guise of fighting "Islamic terrorism," the reawakening of long dormant French imperialism straddles the fine line between comedy and tragedy. A French air strike against a rebel-held town wound up killing over a hundred, including many civilians, but the triumphal mood in Paris soon dimmed when it was suddenly discovered that the mission  dubbed "Serval" by the French, after a North African wildcat  which was supposed to take a few weeks will instead require an extended campaign.

Wildcat? Tabby cat is more like it.

Before we can come to any appreciation of what is actually happening in Mali, the narrative we are being sold needs first to be debunked. News accounts refer to the rebels as "Islamists," an easy label to affix to groups very few know anything about. The reality, however, is quite different: the rebels are Tuaregs of Northwest Africa, a nomadic group whose historic homeland crosses the boundaries of Mali, Algeria, Libya, Niger, and Burkina Faso. They are herders and smugglers, whose caravans once provided the only source of commercial contact between the empires of central Africa and the Arab lands to the north. Their fight for independence precedes the existence of Al Qaeda by a hundred and fifty years.

In the Great Scramble for European colonies that began at the end of the 19th century, French colonialists invaded, seized the land, and subjected the locals to a program of forced "assimilation" into "French civilization." The Tuaregs have been fighting to regain their independence ever since. Today, however, that struggle has been reinterpreted as yet another example of "Islamic terrorism."

This is outright false. The Tuareg independence movement is led by the National. Movement for the Liberation of Awazad (MNLA), a secular organization that only wants autonomy for the Tuareg areas of Mali. There are active Islamists in Mali, affiliated with Ansar Dine, which has no known affiliation with Al Qaeda in the Mahgreb other than the fact that Ansar Dine’s leader, Ag Ghaly, is a cousin of AQIM commander Hamada Ag Hamada. "It is true that Ansar Dine have the black flags, but they are not Al Qaeda," said MNLA spokesman Ag Assarid. "They want stability on the streets," which the "government" of Mali is unable to provide, and "they are against Al Qaeda too." North African specialist Salma Belaala concurs: “We can’t make a systematic link between the AQIM and Tuareg. It’s completely false."

In any case, the tactical alliance between the MNLA and Ansar Dine has been an on and off affair: days after the "merger" of their forces was announced, the MNLA began to back off  and, a week later, the lash up was back on again. This link to "terrorism," never mind Al Qaeda, is tenuous indeed  but how else will the revanchist dream of a revived French empire in Africa be realized except under the rubric of the "war on terrorism"?

If the French invasion  or, rather, re-invasion  of Mali is really aimed at expunging Al Qaeda, then perhaps they ought to be attacking the Algerians: Professor Jeremy Keenan, of the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, says the Algerians have longtime links not only to Ag Ghaly, but also to important Al Qaeda figures, including Abdelhamid abou Zaid. The Algerians, he says, have an interest in supporting the "specter" of Al Qaeda looming in the Sahel because it increases their value to the US  and promises to reap a bonanza in military and economic aid.

As for the "government" of Mali  after a series of Tuareg victories in the north, the military overthrew the elected government and declared martial law. The army complained that not enough attention was being paid to crushing the Tuareg insurgency, and last month they seized the presidential palace, the state television station, and arrested key members of the legitimate government, although the President, Amadou Toure, escaped. This is the "government" the French, with aid from the US and Britain, are fighting to preserve.

What in the name of all that’s holy is going on here? Why this war?

Economically depressed, riven by deep social, ethnic, and political divisions, France is suffering from a crisis of national self-esteem. The attempt by the Socialist government to impose a program of confiscatory taxation  up to 75 percent of income  while ushering in a regime of austerity on the populace is proving immensely unpopular. With forces on the far left and the far right fast gaining traction, the "centrist" Socialists of Francois Hollande are desperate to refurbish their image as soft and indecisive. After the assault on Mali, Hollande will no longer be known as "Flanby," after a gelatinous dessert.

The reassertion of French imperialism has nothing to do with "terrorism," Al Qaeda, or anything remotely connected to either of these phenomena. Instead, it has everything to do with French politics, and the long history of the French expansionist movement. Since the days of the Great Scramble, there has been a small but influential colonialist lobby which constantly agitated for the expansion and development of France’s overseas empire, especially in North Africa. Initially these ideologues rationalized their program of colonial conquest by pointing to the virtues of French civilization as a benign influence on the downtrodden races of the Dark Continent. Indeed, the first champions of extending the benefits of rich sauces and an inexplicable conceit to the benighted Africans were explicit racialists. As fervent anti-clericalist and Republican politician Jules Ferry (twice Prime Minister of France) put it to the National Assembly:

"Gentlemen, I must speak from a higher and more truthful plane. It must be stated openly that, in effect, superior races have rights over inferior races."

This superiority, Ferry averred, gave them not only the "right" but the "duty" to raise the French tricolor over darkest Africa. Societies for the propagation of colonialism, the Comité de l’Afrique Française and the Union coloniale française, grew up, and lobbied for government subsidies in order to "develop" the colonies and  coincidentally  enrich the merchants of Lyons, Marseilles, and other port cities. Chambers of commerce were a key link in this powerful lobby.

The "assimilationist" rhetoric of the colonialists  the idea that the Africans were going to be properly "civilized" and made into model French citizens  soon gave way to the "developmental" phase of French imperialism, during which the civilizing mission was subordinated to the alleged commercial advantages of empire. Except it turned out that these colonies were financially impractical, and turned a loss  although some well-placed merchants, with the right connections, turned enormous profits.

Mali is Africa’s third largest producer of gold, and the recent discovery of vast unexploited sources of oil on traditional Tuareg stomping grounds should give us some idea of the commercial motives behind the French incursion. Yet it isn’t just greed that motivates the new Napoleons: you’ll note the French have been increasingly self-assertive of late, always the first to call for intervention in this or that "crisis," from Libya to Syria and now taking the lead in Mali. This burst of nationalistic fervor is very convenient for the French political class, which presides over a near bankrupt museum of past glories and little else. What better way to divert attention away from such a sorry fate than to gin up a convenient war in which, once again, the mystic virtues of "French civilization" emerge victorious to universal applause?

The US was reportedly reluctant to get involved, but got dragged in when the French overrode Washington’s caution and went ahead anyway. Now we are stuck, once again, "leading from behind," i.e. cleaning up the mess our allies leave behind.

Here is a perfect lesson in how a local authority with no popular mandate  the Malian "government," in this instance  can gin up a "terrorist" scare in order to maintain its tenuous hold over its own people. Just as, during the cold war, local tyrants from Argentina to Vietnam ginned up Western intervention in the name of the "war on communism," so their 21st century equivalents are following the same pattern. When will we ever learn?

Mali is no more a real country than Libya ever was  both are creations of European imperialism, which drew arbirary borders in the Great Scramble and then left, leaving local tribes and clans to fight it out among themselves. In order to justify their return, the new imperialists are claiming to be fighting "terrorism," and yet what they really seem to be battling is their own undeniable decline. The only "crisis" here is the crisis of French self-esteem  and the "multilateralism" that drags us into every conflict, no matter how obscure.

NOTES IN THE MARGIN

Check out my interview on the Lew Rockwell Show, where I talk about the neocons, Hagel, and the state of the libertarian movement, among other topics.

I’m on Twitter quite a bit these days, and you might want to follow me here.

Here is the link for buying the second edition of my 1993 book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement, with an Introduction by Prof. George W. Carey, a Forward by Patrick J. Buchanan, and critical essays by Scott Richert and David Gordon.

Buy my biography of the great libertarian thinker, An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard, here.

So it's all about (surprise!surprise!)…. oil and Franco glory… looking tough….. Great…!!! Seems to be the white mans burden to relieve the locals in far flung places of their resources…. And anything of value…… That yellowcake sure qualifies… And NOW we have Christian plunderers vs Islamic nationalists….., It might be fair and or just, but the plunderers are far from home….. pursuing claiming to seek some abstract ideological "adjustment"….. Where the "terrorists" are protecting their homelands against Hollande's looters,guns, bombs and invaders…..

Many thanks to AW.com for telling me, us…. the non-imperial side of this conflict and showing the true faces of our 'ally'…. Perhaps the Russians could send a plane load of SAMs to keep the French and NATO honest….. and perhaps get in on the coming bonanza there…!!! Or has China already inked the deal …??

Tom Mauel

I think those vast Uranium reserves might have something to do with the invasion of Mali. Along with the gold and oil reserves you mentioned above. England has spent a lot more on the Falklands lucrative fishing rights, (and huge off shore oil reserves.)

France is involved in another African war and the USA is backing them. Why? Aren't we involved in about 20 other African countries? Obama seems obsessed with his late, absent, father and his father's continent. Another very informative essay Justin.

rwe2late

According to Raimondo, that will all change once Hagel's appointment is approved.

Bianca

Isn't the fellow who came to power by a coup in fact trained here, on US military bases, for that purpose? And that he was in US for the purpose of training, seminars, and who knows what else, about 6-7 times? And, conveniently, the coup was organized just before the end of the presidential term, so that no awkward questions would be asked, if he ousted the President after elections have been already scheduled. You see, in Mali, anything but elections. Elections meant order and more Chinese capital investments. Would not be surprised if the insignificant rebellion by Tuaregs was taken as an exuse, and perfect timing. The expansion of chaos that now involves all sorts of local groups, not just Tuaregs — is just what naturally happens when an area is destabilized. France should know better, just like US. It is costly and counterproductive to destabilize countries, because regardless of who "wins", the costs will be onerous on everyone. But, as Raimondo said, it is about the Empire and the pride. Even if it bankrupts the empire. Well, at least Deparduex will not be paying for it.

tadzio

"Enrich the merchants of Lyons, Marseilles, and other port cities." Lyons is a manufacturing city in the Rhone-Alpine region. It is on a river but cannot be considered a port. It has extensive highway, railroad and air shipping facilities in addition great restaurants and magnificent examples of architecture from various eras.

JohnDowser

Excusez-moi, tadzio, but Lyon still has something which can be easily called a port: "Port Édouard-Herriot" with a throughput of 11 million tons commercial trade a year which for a transit port makes it significant enough. But one has to understand the portal function in a broader light than just the harbour though: large airports, complex roads, TGV, large pipelines – it's really better called a hub city perhaps. And in the context of merchants it's still a good city to mention.

John V. Walsh

A very informative and readable piece by Justin – one of the best yet on Mali.
But I think he underestimates the coordination between the US and France – I do not believe for a moment that France acted alone in this – more likely it was given the "lead" role by the US.
This is one more step in asserting US control over Africa, something in the works long before Obama but perhaps hurried along by talk of Pan Africanism by the late Gaddafi and others.
Let us hope the African rebellion spreads and let us hope that the moribund antiwar movement will resurrect itself, quit its love affair with humanitarian intervention and help get us out of the ugly business of Empire.

Some interesting points, but before anyone suggests re-branding French fries as Fiefdom fries maybe we could extend your hypothesis a little and ask whether it isn't a new global hybrid of colonialism and corporatism which is behind today's Afrika Korps?
Uranium, gold and oil are all there for the plunder, and national governments have increasingly limited functions, riddled as they are with those who work their own very private interests and agendas.
Nowadays these interests are often entirely devoid of any national concern, and this is what has changed. A hundred and fifty years ago for example the owners of the East India Company were all British, and hence could at least be said to be serving British interests.
The East India Company's modern day counterparts however are not operating under the same constraints.

conumishu

The image Mr. Raimondo depicted of competing dogs packing together to fight the wolf applies to US-French relations too. Against China's influence they are united. Against any genuine nationalist movement that would endanger "free trade" in the former colonies and present neo-colonies they are united. When it comes to sharing the pie they are not. I remember watching on TV5 channel, yeras ago, certainly before 9/11, a retired French intelligence officer speaking bitterly about the US' below the belt punches in many areas France considered to be its sphere of influence in Africa. Including behind the scenes interference in the Rwanda-Burundi debacle, which probably hit the lowest point as French public image as a benevolent former colonial power was concerned. My guess is US won the covert war and brought France in line, in a subordinate role which is much closer to realities. But it won't surprise me if French pride (and interests) would push for a payback time, overbidding imperialist breaktroughs where it puts US in a fait accompli situation. France has some wild cards left, many connections and a certain cultural attraction after more than a century long influence in large portions of Africa, so it shouldn't be dismissed easily. And, if US wouldn't want to play along, why is building up the African command? (That would be the day, to see US forces stop the French imperialism adventurism, ha, ha)

richard vajs

The thing that comes to my mind, the neocons must be running France also – they are an enterprising bunch.
Isn't Mali where "Timbuctu" is located – long famed in the genre of Beau Geste and "capi blancs" as the most godforsaken place on Earth; last refuge for lonely men escaping their past? Of course, we will want a part in it – we are suckers for a chance to kill to kill some natives armed only with old single shot rifles and riding camels.

richard vajs

Sorry, I should have spelled that "kepi blancs" for you folks that went to Ivy League schools (myself, I attended Ole Miss, Univ of Texas and Univ of West Florida – I graduated more ignorant than I went in).

Tom Shehan

Maybe no one knows, but are we going to be subjected to more remakes of "Beau Geste"?

didi

There is at least one difference between French colonial imperialism of the 19th and 20th centuries and today. In these past centuries French North African colonies were fought for by foreigners in the notorious Legion Etrangere. Today it is French boys and girls that get killed in Mali.
With regards to gold, that is no longer economically and strategically as important as it was when major countries were still on the gold standard and the French national bank helped to wreck the world economy by hoarding gold. Today strategic materials are anything that can be used to produce energy hence oil and uranium.

Sam Lowry

With regards to gold, huh? By 1971, there were four times as many Federal Reserve notes in circulation as there was gold that supposedly backed it. The money was created out of nothing to finance, among other things, the Vietnam war. France, among other nations, simply demanded that the U.S. honor its stated obligation to redeem those notes for gold. At least at the time, the French, more than others except possibly Germany, were aware of the economic damage of monetary expansion (what was called 'inflation' in any dictionary printed before the 1970s).

In fact, the main motivation for a nation such as the United States to control energy resources is to force the rest of the world to use its fiat currency when purchasing those resources, thus imparting value on otherwise worthless magic-symbol-covered pieces of paper. Iraq's real crime? They switched from dollars to euros in 2001. Iran's real crime, they were switching from dollars to euros and yen, at least before the sanctions. Ironically, they are now switching to gold. Libya's real crime? They were about to implement a gold-backed dinar.

omop

Cecil Rhodes's words as interpreted by the French in Africa;- "I contend that we are he first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit, the better it is for the human race…. the greater portion of the world under our rule simply means the end of all wars."

Thats Rhodes's Scholarship guiding philosophy in action in the western world. Or as the song goes, "anything you [US] can do we [brits, french, israelis, muslims] can do better."

A friend remembers having met the Turareg emir some years back and was told that he had met the real ruler of North Africa. History repeating itself over and over. Interesting review by Mr. R.

Mark Thomason

All important points, and clearly made. Thanks.

However, it is not all one thing or all the other. As we see in Syria, the radicals seek out conflicts to join. There are a few, and if the conflict builds up there will be more. It is self-fulfilling. Taking war to Mali will cause al Qaida to go to Mali. The same thing happened in Iraq, which had no al Qaida until we destroyed the place.

In addition to your good points, we need to be clear on this self-fulfilling aspect of chasing after al Qaida to every distant outpost, all the way to Timbuktu.

Peter Gilkes

So amputations haven't taken place, women aren't confined to their homes unless fetching water and music hasn't been forbidden in the north of Mali? I'm really relieved to hear that.

It sounds as if some of you on here still eat Freedom Fries with your burgers.

The rhetorical device "So…" is often used to mask inconvenient facts and/or logical lapses (such as here; an unstated assumption). Your sarcastic "relief" and clumsy and confusing ad-hominum sort of confirm your first premise; that social conditions in Mali suck. Taken as stipulated.

Would you care to venture another premise, for instance, "Someone should do something", and even a conclusion, for instance "Therefore, the French should bomb those camel-jockys into the 21st century." But I don't want to put words in your mouth, try it yourself; A and B; therefore C.

You need to master logic before moving to rhetoric if you want to become a Hasbara adept. Good luck on your journey, grasshopper.

I sort of want you to explain what you were trying to say, if anything, in your original post, otherwise we must conclude you are not ready to move from correcting spelling errors to actually constructing a coherent statement. Admittedly, the current champions of the rhetorical arts (broadly – neocons) don't have much use for logic, formal or not, but they do need to be familiar with it, in order to counter it in the public arena. Misdirection from the point and expressions of "feelings" such as relief, show that you have a good grasp of the basic concepts of Hasbara*, but you still have a way to go.

Before you can hold more than one fallacy at a time, like at National Review, you need to able to construct one. Try to finish this sentence "Amputations have taken place, women are confined to their homes unless fetching water and music has been forbidden in the north of Mali, So,…

*I hope I spelled that right; it wasn't in my dictionary and who can trust anything on the internet? Sorry about any other style or punctuation errors you may have previously overlooked or herein. Really.

Peter Gilkes

It seems that people on here didn't feel anything had changed in Mali until the French forces arrived. I believe it changed when a more fundamentalist group began to impose itself by force, with the result that "Amputations have taken place, women are confined to their homes unless fetching water and music has been forbidden in the north of Mali."

I have no solution to this particular problem, nor the global problem of fundamentalist Islam, but simply felt the anti-French tenor of the 'debate' needed countering. What I feel at the moment is that the French will regret this 'invasion' but had little other alternative.

Thank you for clarifying your remarks. I'm sorry if I seemed rude, but my bullshit detector is set to super-sensitive and doesn't handle ambiguity well (error:42 – unhandled exception). It's especially troubled by French politics, however French Foreign policy pegs the needle right into American and British range, so I know it's calibrated correctly.

Last year our own Scot Horton was asking “Where's Mali? I've never heard of the place!” , and I wondered at the time how many other Americans were asking the very same question…
Banning Eyre is one US citizen who has an intimate knowledge of this beautiful country and its people, developed over many years through his love of its music and culture.
His book 'In Griot Time' published in 2000 is an insightful read.

Peter Gilkes

A programme on Radio 4 on Mali and Griot said that Malian musicians will not travel to Senegal this year or they may not be able to go home. If their country falls.

Rightster

As we have invaded Iraq that had done nothing to us and wasn't a threat to us, and we appear to be supporting France's invasion of Mali, why didn't we support the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in their effort to "fight the terrorists"?

Of all the European colonial powers, France was the most reluctant to give up its colonies. It had to be blasted out of Indo-China and Algeria. It still retains a substantial number of smaller possessions: French Guiana, Guadaloupe and Dominica in the Caribbean, Reunion in the Indian Ocean, New Caledonia and French Polynesia in the Pacific, and a few others. So there in nothng very new here, although it is hard to see what they are going to get out of Mali. Delusions of past grandeur.

Another Guest

What I was hoping Raimondo would address…but failed to do…is to connect this latest dot…to the picture that is now clearly emerging…

The US…through its behemoth CIA and other parts of the giant covert apparatus…whose manpower…money power…firepower…and any other kind of power you want to name…has created an jihad terror army with which it is able to wreak havoc in any country that is targeted…

It is not disputed that they made Osama bin Laden… and more or less created the mujaheddin to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan…supposedly the CIA and Al Qaida (and the rest of the jihadist groups) parted company after that job was accomplished…good job guys…OBL we won't be needing you any more buddy…

Or so the story goes…but why would they…?…surely the people who run a huge…secret…and global organization that has immense power to do just about anything anywhere in the world…and would love nothing more than to have even more disruptive power at its fingertips…why on earth would they give up such a hugely potent weapon as Islamic terrorism…

It sure could come in useful in making life miserable for opponents big and small…from China…Russia…and Iran…to secular Islamic states like…Oh I dunno…Libya…Syria…Pakistan…

It was only a year ago that Al Qaida dogs were let loose in Libya…the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group…known to be an Al Qaida affiliate…was funded…armed…and supported with a Nato bombing campaign…and finally installed in power…

Now that same group and all the various others including the Al Nusra Front…and Al Qaida in Islamic Maghreb…are hard at work trying to topple another US thorn in the side…Assad's secular Syria…

In Mali we have the local Toureg genuinely fighting to throw off the colonial yoke…much to the dismay of the colonial French and their own colonial overlords the US…but guess what…suddenly all these same "terror" groups appear there as well…and hey that is now the "reason" to go in…

Never mind that the local people do not want anything to do with these jihadis…yet here they are…why…?…clearly the most logical reason is that they are the best possible cover story for a Western intervention…

And we can see strains of that same melody starting to emerge in Syria…first the rebels were the good guys seeking democracy…and if that story does not work…then we have to go in there and make sure the "bad" Al Qaida type rebels don't take over…

It's perfect…it works both ways…heads I win…tails you lose…

So let's wake up people and realize a very simple fact…the US has built up a global terrorist army that it can deploy just about anywhere in the greater Mideast region…and create havoc…overthrow regimes…gain access to resources…and best of all…an excuse for endless war…the war on terror…ha ha…

Also a guest

So the decision by the African Union to maintain the colonial boundaries at liberation is a mirage?
"Mali is no more a real country than Libya ever was – both are creations of European imperialism, which drew arbitrary borders in the Great Scramble and then left, leaving local tribes and clans to fight it out among themselves."

Oh, and the destruction of the tombs of Sufi saints Sidi Mahmoud, Sidi Moctar and Alpha Moya because the perpetrators believe that these tombs are idolatry and "haraam" is not "Islamic terrorism"?

"In war, truth is the first casualty"

Oswaldwasalefty

Well, what do you know, the Civilizing Mission is back in business circa 2013. When you don't have the political balls to solve your own financial crisis at home, find some nomadic African people to beat up on.

Writing this from Phnom Penh. I can't overstate how great it is for a former French colony to not have the Euro-American meddlers and their instruments of death flying overhead. My only wish for the rebels is to shoot every one of them down. No other way to get the bastards out of their country.

Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com, and a senior fellow at the Randolph Bourne Institute. He is a contributing editor at The American Conservative, and writes a monthly column for Chronicles. He is the author of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement [Center for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2000], and An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard [Prometheus Books, 2000].